When does thought transition to belief?

[XenoFish 86,861]

What does any of this bickering have to do with the threads topic? 

[psyche101 33,137]

36 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

What does any of this bickering have to do with the threads topic? 

I'm pretty sure that it that many feel Mr Walkers thoughts have become beliefs, yet he claims that what seems unlikely to many is not a belief but reality. 

Its sort of an example in progress IMHO. 

[XenoFish 86,861]

Just now, psyche101 said:

I'm pretty sure that it that many feel Mr Walkers thoughts have become beliefs, yet he claims that what seems unlikely to many is not a belief but reality. 

Its sort of an example in progress IMHO. 

I reject his reality for my own. His beliefs are opinions, if they were facts they wouldn't be beliefs. 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

I'm honestly not sure why this proof thing is so hard for you to grasp. It's quite simple. It's not unusual to have a wife. Talking to God however tends to be more the sort of thing crazy people do say. Terrorists, activists, fundamentalists and just ignorant people are often cited as talking to OT inspired by God. Pilots with severe oxygen deprivation have God experiences. More often than not, such claims tend to go hand in hand with irrational and unstable personalities, or medical conditions. I can't think of a validated accepted story of exchanges between God or aliens in all gathered history. I'm honestly not sure why you feel you would be an exception to that standard? 

Sure we can't prove that anymore than we can a teapot in orbit with Mars, but there's more good reason to consider such stories bunk rather than valid. You have been there a long time now. You must have realised that the only people who have a very imaginative spiritual ideology consider the stories as seemingly valid. With all due respect, why do you feel that will change? Others see inconsistencies in your claims, even if they had not, do you feel that consistency would garner credibility? 

I understand you being upset at being painted as deeply irrational, but at the same time, and considering the above, it seems from an outside view that this is actually what you are interested in achieving regardless? 

It is  you who don't get it  Commonality means nothing when it comes to proof Just because YOU have a dog should not make you more inclined to believe me when I say I have one.

  What you are saying is what i have been arguing.

People are prepared to accept some things without interrogating the evidences, because they  are able to believe them on faith. It is where they cannot believe ,in faith, that they demand proof 

i work out what is real using evidences available to me. Those evidences are not available to you I have proof of gods existence You do not Thus you have to choose a belief positon

Proofs and evidences are available to one person and not to others, all the time  You are talking about transferable proofs The y are rare and still depend on the recipient trusting the source of the proof  

Only bias makes a person predisposed to belief or disbelief  The rational position would be to suspend both belief and disbelief until you have more evidence and can know. 

I wouldnt have a clue who accepts rejects or hasn't made up their mind about the stories except where the y explicitly tell me.

As far as i can see it is not a religious bias but a kind of bias towards  disbelieving ANYTHING that the y haven't had proven to them.

  Again fair enough, but suspending belief would be more logical than choosing disbelief. 

 I think people have different reasons for rejecting such things.

it can be fear

A need to be in control of their world.

  A very rationalist/materialist view about the nature of life and reality etc

a rejection of the beliefs of their parents and the authority figures from their childhood .  

lol I am not irrational I am about the most rational person you will find. Indeed over y life i have been accused more of being to rational and logical, and not emotional enough, than the opposite 

The truth is that i care deeply but always behave logically and rationally. It is how i was raised from birth My parents were humanists They never lost their temper but did demonstrate a lot of love The y never spoke angrily, never put us down, or abused us verbally The y were never unreasonable or unfair, but quite strict and just.

  Thats how I learned to treat others not emotionally but rationally.  Eg If someone needs help, help them, don't just tell them how sorry you are for them  

No Its not about me or how I feel.

it is about people who may miss out on an important part of life if they refuse to accept it   Who may live a life less than it could be 

My stories have been consistent since 2014 when i came to UM Others come in on parts of them or put their own biases on them. But basically none have changed Any minor discrepancies just show the y are true rather than fabrications that  I maintain perfectly eg i might say the doorway was 8 moons high one decade and the next say it was 7 or 9.  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

I'm pretty sure that it that many feel Mr Walkers thoughts have become beliefs, yet he claims that what seems unlikely to many is not a belief but reality. 

Its sort of an example in progress IMHO. 

You are correct, i think. Those who cannot believe such things could be real, must believe they are beliefs   or lies or hallucinations  

[Mr Walker 5,293]

1 hour ago, XenoFish said:

I reject his reality for my own. His beliefs are opinions, if they were facts they wouldn't be beliefs. 

Some times this is true, but the events i describe are simple factual truths (as best as i can remember describe and understand them ) 

So some of them are facts, and not beliefs. The others are more logical deductions, or opinions, than beliefs 

I do not construct and build beliefs. I do not  have beliefs built on faith  I either know something or I have an open mind on it, waiting for evidences and proofs 

So, if you told me you  could disappear and transmit your  body around the world I wouldn't believe or disbelieve you.  I have no evidences to allow me to do either.  i would wait until i could know.  I certainly would not suggest you had to be lying or hallucinating, because i have no proof of either     

[onlookerofmayhem 1,883]

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

No one here can prove a single thing about themselves to anyone who is not ready to believe them on faith.

You keep repeating this as if it's some kind of mantra. 

It is true to a certain extent, but the problem is you are claiming extraordinary things.

There is not really an issue believing that somebody owns a dog or had eggs and toast for breakfast.  It's common knowledge that dogs, eggs and toast exist.

When somebody claims they can astral travel or locate lost objects with remote viewing,  there is hesitation because neither of these has ever been verified to actually exist.

You do a disservice to the world if you hold these as important and learnable skills, yet make no effort to bring them to light by proving you can actually achieve them.

If somebody claimed they could fly like Superman and that everyone was also capable with enough practice and effort they would do their best to transfer that knowledge. 

It's not very teacher-like to tell people something is possible, yet refuse to actually show it's possible.

How is anyone supposed to learn if you don't teach them?

 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

7 hours ago, Sherapy said:

 

Mr Walker, I am not asking how you reality check as it isn’t a substitute for evidence that you are being asked to provide for your claims.

you then quote

“It doesn't matter  (to me) what  you believe but failing to believe means you lack knowledge of something important, and a human abilty which many people have, or might have if they learned how to develop it.“ in other words you are posting claims refusing to offer evidence and then admonishing and belittling those telling them they lack knowledge and some ability that you yourself cannot substantiate, I don’t accept any claims at face value.

 

 

Not admonishing or belittling.

Just posting a clear and simple truth. If a person rejects knowledge and understanding (whatever the reasons for their rejection) then they dis empower themselves and are less of a  person than if the use ALL of their abilities and keep an open mind on how to learn new skills, empower themselves etc.

  so if you learned to speed read, improve your memory,  control lucid dreams or project your consciousness, you would be  more complete, skilled and able person than if you did not.

Just as person who learns to read is more empowered and powerful than if the y did not learn to read

Would you say i was belittling a person  who could not read if i told them  the y could learn to read and it would benefit them to do so? 

Iam not sure but i think you not only don't believe ive learned those skills but don't believe the y are real/ possible skills.

If that is so you are deliberately  limiting yourself your power and your abilities because you don't believe you could do it . 

 i believe you could.but it might not be worth your time and effort as an adult For a child it was extremely  empowering educational and entertaining.   It can be used for many functional purposes as an adult including strengthening your resilience, learning new skills, and problem solving. 

[Habitat 7,247]

9 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

How is anyone supposed to learn if you don't teach them?

Has he ever said he could teach people these things you speak of ?

[Liquid Gardens 9,485]

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It doesn't matter  (to me) what  you believe but failing to believe means you lack knowledge of something important, and a human abilty which many people have, or might have if they learned how to develop it. 

It doesn't mean that at all.  You don't seem to realize that your sermons about how important these imaginary powers of yours are is inconsistent with your disinterest in even attempting to try to use them.  You brag about how you've supposedly 'saved' thousands of people but when it comes to 'something important', it's 'you're all on your own'.

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

The evidences for this are things i observed which were unknown to me and sometimes to anyone else but were later found to be true

So?  The rings of Saturn have a limited number of possible thicknesses, that your dream matched part of the thickness of the rings isn't remarkable, what were the odds, 1-2 or 1-3 or something similar?  I won $2500 in the lottery a long time ago, guess I'm clairvoyant.

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Year later science  found out

So science is relevant?  Why do you ignore what science says about memory then?  Here's a reminder of the current state from wiki:

Memory is not a perfect processor, and is affected by many factors. The ways by which information is encoded, stored, and retrieved can all be corrupted. The amount of attention given new stimuli can diminish the amount of information that becomes encoded for storage.^[2] Also, the storage process can become corrupted by physical damage to areas of the brain that are associated with memory storage, such as the hippocampus.^[16][17] Finally, the retrieval of information from long-term memory can be disrupted because of decay within long-term memory.^[2] Normal functioning, decay over time, and brain damage all affect the accuracy and capacity of the memory

Your angel story was from even further back then I thought, I think 40+ years.  I've also read that science has reason to believe that the more often a memory is retrieved the more susceptible it is to corruption, and you've retrieved these stories hundreds of times in just the last 5 years or so.  Yea, I know, science only matters when it agrees with you.

[Liquid Gardens 9,485]

6 hours ago, eight bits said:

Overall, when people look back about 10 years or so, and tote up how many peer-reviewed papers that old were found to contain substantial errors of fact or application of theory ("low quality"), it works out to as much as 50% (!). The exception is elite mathematics journals. It is very rare to find an error there, and no surprise, their peer review is arduous for both reviewer (often one reviewer is assigned to work with the author like a second job) and for the reviewee.

Interesting.  I guess I'm not surprised math journals rarely have errors, it seems a little more confined and straightforward than science since there's no 'experiment' to introduce additional errors.  I definitely agree though that the quality control happens after publication, but I'd bet that the substantial errors in papers that did not pass peer-review was a bit higher than 50%. Of course none of this review would even be necessary if, depending on how you interpret it, 'no one needs anyone else to validate what they see'.

Edited October 11 by Liquid Gardens

[Liquid Gardens 9,485]

4 hours ago, Habitat said:

It does arise from insecurity,

So does narcissism.  So does months-long obsessions with one particular 'observation'.  As long as we're playing pretend psychologist.

[XenoFish 86,861]

12 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

So does narcissism.  So does months-long obsessions with one particular 'observation'.  As long as we're playing pretend psychologist.

You forgot about the 'team' obsession. Which is repeated whenever a stress point is reached. At least it seems that way. 

[jmccr8 14,804]

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I am reluctant to waste my time with people who simply wont believe but you are always polite and ask sensible questions 

it was quite late at night 

we lived on a farm, miles from any other house and 20 miles form the nearest town 

The "doorway"  was about 45 degrees above the horizon to the  south west.  It was the shape of a doorway and about the width of 4 or 5 full moons and the height of   9 or 10.  The sky was just normal with no moon but lots of stars 

The doorway was sharply defined.  It looked like a hole cut into the sky 

Inside it and from my perspective "behind it" was a bright fluorescent light it was similar to the moon but twenty times as bright or maybe even more  It did not spill out of the door but remained behind it It had been there for a while if the dogs barking was any indication.  It remained in the sky for another 30 seconds to a minute while I  observed  it and took mental notes about its angle of incidence, size and bearing.  Then it began moving directly at me, expanding in size as it approached. Within about 10 seconds it had reached me. i was walking backwards, but came up against  our ute in the yard and couldn't back up any more.  it passed right through me (or i passed through it ) leaving no real physical sensation  except  for an odd mild tingling   

Hi Walker

Thanks for recognizing the effort that I have invested into creating a productive relationship here with you and for expanding on the circumstances of events.

So what I am understanding is that the shape and intensity of the light was not the same as it was during the first experience then and this time it moved directly towards you whereas in the first incident the light was incredibly bright and stationary with no door feature. How did you determine that it was the same entity in both experiences if this time there was no communication?

jmccr8

[jmccr8 14,804]

6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually, it can be the ONLY point of a discussion forum like this.

Hi Walker

Many discussions that occur in the threads do reveal much about a poster and when discussing some topics where members are not using solely personal experience there are links used to enforce one's position and that is the major point of the forum from my perspective is to learn and question.

6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

No one here can prove a single thing about themselves to anyone who is not ready to believe them on faith.

I have just taken a couple of photos of a print that an artist who was a client gave me using the forum in the background on my projector so that both can be seen at the same time with my user name taped on the picture. The photo on the back side of the print has a personal note of thanks written on it by the artist and the print was a thank you from him and his family for the work I did building the art gallery that is the subject of the in the print. I will run them through google paint to resize them and send a PM to you and a few other members that are familiar with me along with links to both the art gallery as well as the artist. So those are things that can be verified and can be used to show that that event happened and I was involved. I am only doing this to demonstrate that it is possible to show that people can give credible reference and we can discuss whether others believe me or not in the thread if you are not satisfied.

6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I have a life time of such events.

I am positive that all of us have had a life full of experiences and for me at this time I have not had any experience that I would categorize as a god experience no matter how weird it was because I know life can be unpredictable and perceptions deceptive. That is why we have critical minds and take the time to properly review the events and personal influences to determine what actually happened.

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I know them  all well but it understandable that people who only read about them here (and don't really take them seriously anyway) get them mixed up

To be honest you do jumble things up sometimes by bouncing around between different events before we actually clarified all the events objectively for just one experience at a time so you will have to own up for some of the confusion. I think you are wrong about how serious some of us are which is why the pressure for clarification is intense for you and a few other posters but even though members are at odds at times we do care about each other and are interested in why people have the experiences and how they interpret them as well as how it affects their lives.

What I have been trying to do with you here is to see if we can get a proper breakdown of each particular event and what was specifically unique to it so we can identify it in other experiences. Then I would like to know in progression why you think the first incident is relative to the second and work our way to today in a structured progression, so maybe a thread of it's own so we can explore this avenue of discovery.

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

lol its not a matter of convincing myself . Like everything in life,  knowing is dependent on convincing evidences proofs etc  I have the same level of proofs for this being as i do for my wife and dog.

Hmm,.. well ah if you say you use reality checkers my first though is you are questioning something that you are not convinced about.

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Is  anyone suggesting i should not accept THEIR reality  because i cannot prove I actually have  either one, to anyone online 

I do accept that your reality is your reality and am pretty sure most of the others do too.

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I dont have to convince myself that i have 3 dogs and a wife. I simply know it .

Of course you don't and I'm not trying to convince you that you don't so what is your point?

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It is exactly the sane for this entity 

 Sane? I know you mean same, same as what those to experiences 30 yrs apart or as your wife's? you see these are the kinds of things that cloud a discussion?

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

There is no way i could prove I had a wife to you online, but if you visited me you would experience the proof yourself.  It is much the same for god 

I really don't need to see her to verify that you are a married man you sound like one. Now if you said you had a harem of young girls I might want some photos for verification.

I am pretty sure I nobody doubts that I am single, nobody asks me to prove I don't have a wife so again a mute point but fun anyway.

jmccr8

[quiXilver 5,310]

The world as talked about, as thought about, is not the world as it is.

The qualities of the 'external' experiential world, depend entirely upon the methods of interaction, the organs by which we relate to and interpret the energies.  This process is interpretaional, individual and internal.

intriguing...  The Hermetics come to mind.  As above, so below.  As within, without.

 

The world as experienced through the senses is relational.  External energies, related to organs that relate with certain wavelengths and these impulses are transduced internally into what we call, our sensory experience of the external world.

The world as thought about, is internal.   Thoughts are not reality.  More akin to reflections.

 

 

As waking conscious mind is akin to awareness in a similar manner that the moon, is akin to actual light by reflecting light.  Reflecting awareness.  Thought is reflected relational interpreted interaction.

We don't consciously beat our hearts, digest our food, secrete hormones...  these are source awareness.

 

 

It is the eye that elicits the sensation of seeing when certain waves of energy interact and are then interpreted.

The ear elicits the experience of sound when a hand strikes the skin of a drum.

Yet without the relationship of hand, drum skin and ear... what is experiencable?

So is the world experienced the world as it is?

Is thought real?

 

[Will Due 5,251]

3 minutes ago, quiXilver said:

Is thought real?

 

Thought is the only thing that's real.

Until one loses the ability to think.

 

 

[Sherapy 23,013]

6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Not admonishing or belittling.

Just posting a clear and simple truth. If a person rejects knowledge and understanding (whatever the reasons for their rejection) then they dis empower themselves and are less of a  person than if the use ALL of their abilities and keep an open mind on how to learn new skills, empower themselves etc.

  so if you learned to speed read, improve your memory,  control lucid dreams or project your consciousness, you would be  more complete, skilled and able person than if you did not.

Just as person who learns to read is more empowered and powerful than if the y did not learn to read

Would you say i was belittling a person  who could not read if i told them  the y could learn to read and it would benefit them to do so? 

Iam not sure but i think you not only don't believe ive learned those skills but don't believe the y are real/ possible skills.

If that is so you are deliberately  limiting yourself your power and your abilities because you don't believe you could do it . 

 i believe you could.but it might not be worth your time and effort as an adult For a child it was extremely  empowering educational and entertaining.   It can be used for many functional purposes as an adult including strengthening your resilience, learning new skills, and problem solving. 

“I am not sure but I think you not only don’t believe I’ve learned these skills but don’t believe you could do it”(Walker).

You are not presenting any evidence that you can do the things you claim, for example: Dan and I proposed a speed reading test for you, I was intrigued by your insistence that comprehension is not sacrificed when you skim read. Honestly, if you had have taken the test and demonstrated otherwise I would have learned something. At this point, you are only offering the claim. In all fairness, I can’t and don’t conclude based on no evidence on woo claims, I ask for the facts and go from there, 
 

To address the second part of your question, on a personal level speed reading has no applicable value in my line of work. I work for doctors, attention to detail, accuracy, double checking, producing evidence for everything I do ( a daily log) demonstrating that I can repeat what I have been taught and can apply feedback for refinement is paramount as I deal with people’s health and well being, I need to be trusted and being a hands on critical thinker aids this

 

. For example: one of my clients has PD, late stages and hallucinations are common for her, I have been taught Validation Therapy, we never encourage those with cognitive impairment to believe their hallucinations/delusions are reality. We find ways to reorient them to reality for their own sense of security this builds a sense of trust between us. 
 

Astral travel is of no interest, call it personal preference, but I prefer the fun of traveling, we just got back from Las Vegas, we took our son for his 21/22 birthday, we are going to Japan next year, I  want to visit Hiroshima, Kyoto, Tokyo... I want to ride a bullet train, I want to experience Japanese culture, eat the food, glean my own impressions and share this unique perspective from being there. My hubby and I love flying it is so fun to share journeys it makes us closer as friends and partners, it is romantic too. The memories and bonding we share are priceless, family is very important to us and we enjoy our sons and experiencing them as adults. 

 

Edited October 11 by Sherapy

[XenoFish 86,861]

I seriously believe that some people really over-think the main topic of this thread. 

[quiXilver 5,310]

thought = placebo? 

[Sherapy 23,013]

7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It is  you who don't get it  Commonality means nothing when it comes to proof Just because YOU have a dog should not make you more inclined to believe me when I say I have one.

  What you are saying is what i have been arguing.

People are prepared to accept some things without interrogating the evidences, because they  are able to believe them on faith. It is where they cannot believe ,in faith, that they demand proof 

i work out what is real using evidences available to me. Those evidences are not available to you I have proof of gods existence You do not Thus you have to choose a belief positon

Proofs and evidences are available to one person and not to others, all the time  You are talking about transferable proofs The y are rare and still depend on the recipient trusting the source of the proof  

Only bias makes a person predisposed to belief or disbelief  The rational position would be to suspend both belief and disbelief until you have more evidence and can know. 

I wouldnt have a clue who accepts rejects or hasn't made up their mind about the stories except where the y explicitly tell me.

As far as i can see it is not a religious bias but a kind of bias towards  disbelieving ANYTHING that the y haven't had proven to them.

  Again fair enough, but suspending belief would be more logical than choosing disbelief. 

 I think people have different reasons for rejecting such things.

it can be fear

A need to be in control of their world.

  A very rationalist/materialist view about the nature of life and reality etc

a rejection of the beliefs of their parents and the authority figures from their childhood .  

lol I am not irrational I am about the most rational person you will find. Indeed over y life i have been accused more of being to rational and logical, and not emotional enough, than the opposite 

The truth is that i care deeply but always behave logically and rationally. It is how i was raised from birth My parents were humanists They never lost their temper but did demonstrate a lot of love The y never spoke angrily, never put us down, or abused us verbally The y were never unreasonable or unfair, but quite strict and just.

  Thats how I learned to treat others not emotionally but rationally.  Eg If someone needs help, help them, don't just tell them how sorry you are for them  

No Its not about me or how I feel.

it is about people who may miss out on an important part of life if they refuse to accept it   Who may live a life less than it could be 

My stories have been consistent since 2014 when i came to UM Others come in on parts of them or put their own biases on them. But basically none have changed Any minor discrepancies just show the y are true rather than fabrications that  I maintain perfectly eg i might say the doorway was 8 moons high one decade and the next say it was 7 or 9.  

Or, some could be applying the skill of critically thinking to the claims that come through this section, 

I picked this section specifically to practice critical thinking and to meet those that are interested in the same, 

In fact, I appreciate those that are willing to share their claims, I do think it is an unspoken that in this section having evidence is going to advance the claim or not. For me, it is about the facts, if I don’t have any I can’t conclude without it. 

I am equally grateful for those that are adept at critical application they have inspired me to learn. 

A comment on ridicule, it is also a form of humor, satire to be specific, it can  serve a positive constructive purpose. 

“Satire, lampoon refer to literary forms in which vices or follies are ridiculed. Satire, the general term, often emphasizes the weakness more than the weak person, and usually implies moral judgment and corrective purpose” (https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2015/03/23/what-is-satire-for/)

Of course, satire can cross the line and when this happens it is appropriate to set boundaries. 
 

 

 

Edited October 11 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker 5,293]

12 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

You keep repeating this as if it's some kind of mantra. 

It is true to a certain extent, but the problem is you are claiming extraordinary things.

There is not really an issue believing that somebody owns a dog or had eggs and toast for breakfast.  It's common knowledge that dogs, eggs and toast exist.

When somebody claims they can astral travel or locate lost objects with remote viewing,  there is hesitation because neither of these has ever been verified to actually exist.

You do a disservice to the world if you hold these as important and learnable skills, yet make no effort to bring them to light by proving you can actually achieve them.

If somebody claimed they could fly like Superman and that everyone was also capable with enough practice and effort they would do their best to transfer that knowledge. 

It's not very teacher-like to tell people something is possible, yet refuse to actually show it's possible.

How is anyone supposed to learn if you don't teach them?

 

Ah you see, but because they are ordinary to me in my life, I don't think of them as extraordinary Many are things i learned as a child  just like  I learned walking and talking and for a long time I honestly thought everyone had the same abilities  It SHOULD be an issue believing ANYTHING a person tells you, from owning a dog, to not  being married.

Just because something is common doesn't mean a person is telling a truth about themselves That is how the best cons work

I learned it as a child As a teacher i was asked to teach kids to read using the method i used as a child. I couldn't.

I was reading before i was 3 years old and had no real idea how i learned to (basically my mu read to me every night I watched the words as she read and while i was 2 yeras old i could read  beceu i had learned both vocabulary and punctuation   It is a bit like this with some of my abilities I can give some tips to help but learning them might take hundreds of hours of effort concentration and discipline over many years (as it did for some of my skills) 

I dont have the time or interest to invest in that, BUT, today you can find web sites to help you explore and develop most of these skill s  

I can teach you how to fly in your dreams but i cant physically fly so I cant teach you that    both projection of consciousness and remote viewing (if that   is what it is) have been demonstrated.

 The govts of america and russia found that the y were not consistent or reliable enough to compete with other forms of espionage but papers from both countries show some remarkable successes by individuals Skeptics don't believe those papers are accurate but cant really disprove them .  

[XenoFish 86,861]

Time for a good XenoFish rant. If for some reason it offends someone for whatever reason, just move on. I don't feel like debating, we can discuss, but I'm not in the mood for a pointless argument. So here I go.

First I would like to state that I feel like I've lost my intellect or I've lost the will to intellectually joust with any of you. This might be due to the sheer monotony of the topics, not sure. But I'm pretty much mentally burned out. Now onto the topic at hand. Thoughts becoming beliefs. The more we think about something, the more it invokes/evokes an emotional response the more 'energy' we put behind that thought. The stronger this thought becomes and the more we convince ourselves of its truth, it becomes a belief. This belief may be built upon factual support or pure speculation. Beliefs are the filter though which we perceive the world on a entirely subjective level. Those Rose-Tinted RayBan's.

How we think about something or someone, even one another is our mental model of that thing/person. Our models are based on limited information concerning the thing/person in question. (from here on out I'll be using person) None of us truly know one another, we know only few things, even if we knew one another directly, we still wouldn't know them. However based on what we know and what we think, we hold beliefs about each others. This, that, whatever. 

For instance if I start to talk about seeing things that I know aren't there. I'm quite positive I know the result of such discussion, ridicule. I know that convincing yourself of a nihilisitc pessimistic world view leads to nowhere. The sheer negative experience generated by hold such a belief as a personal truth is dangerous. All beliefs no matter how innocent must be changeable. Any time a belief is held rigidly or adamantly it is on the verge of being a fanatical belief. 

Such fanatical beliefs are never good. They narrow the view of the beholder. I can see positive benefits of religion/spirituality, I can also see the negative effects of such beliefs. As I mentioned before that atheism lead me to nihilism, meaninglessness. Theism gave me a guilt complex for doing anything and fear of being punished for everything, even existing. Which also lead to a feeling of meaninglessness. But these things are just beliefs. Models based on what I have learned, what I have thought, and what I came to believe.

At all times we are entertaining some type of thought, those thoughts can become our beliefs, beliefs can become our personal reality. 

 

Edited October 12 by XenoFish

[Mr Walker 5,293]

5 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Or, some could be applying the skill of critically thinking to the claims that come through this section, 

I picked this section specifically to practice critical thinking and to meet those that are interested in the same, 

In fact, I appreciate those that are willing to share their claims, I do think it is an unspoken that in this section having evidence is going to advance the claim or not. For me, it is about the facts, if I don’t have any I can’t conclude without it. 

I am equally grateful for those that are adept at critical application they have inspired me to learn. 

A comment on ridicule, it is also a form of humor, satire to be specific, it can  serve a positive constructive purpose. 

“Satire, lampoon refer to literary forms in which vices or follies are ridiculed. Satire, the general term, often emphasizes the weakness more than the weak person, and usually implies moral judgment and corrective purpose” (https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2015/03/23/what-is-satire-for/)

Of course, satire can cross the line and when this happens it is appropriate to set boundaries. 
 

 

 

Nothing wrong with true critical thinking which is evidence based AND keeps an open mind to ANY possibility (ie it does not discount anything as impossible before the thinking process begins) 

Satire is marginally humour because it has an educative and positive value and can be funny  

Ridicule does not. It is not primarily intended  to amuse, but to denigrate others. It has no redeeming social value as satire does, and is too unpleasant /destructive,  to be amusing. 

[Mr Walker 5,293]

6 hours ago, Sherapy said:

“I am not sure but I think you not only don’t believe I’ve learned these skills but don’t believe you could do it”(Walker).

You are not presenting any evidence that you can do the things you claim, for example: Dan and I proposed a speed reading test for you, I was intrigued by your insistence that comprehension is not sacrificed when you skim read. Honestly, if you had have taken the test and demonstrated otherwise I would have learned something. At this point, you are only offering the claim. In all fairness, I can’t and don’t conclude based on no evidence on woo claims, I ask for the facts and go from there, 
 

To address the second part of your question, on a personal level speed reading has no applicable value in my line of work. I work for doctors, attention to detail, accuracy, double checking, producing evidence for everything I do ( a daily log) demonstrating that I can repeat what I have been taught and can apply feedback for refinement is paramount as I deal with people’s health and well being, I need to be trusted and being a hands on critical thinker aids this

 

. For example: one of my clients has PD, late stages and hallucinations are common for her, I have been taught Validation Therapy, we never encourage those with cognitive impairment to believe their hallucinations/delusions are reality. We find ways to reorient them to reality for their own sense of security this builds a sense of trust between us. 
 

Astral travel is of no interest, call it personal preference, but I prefer the fun of traveling, we just got back from Las Vegas, we took our son for his 21/22 birthday, we are going to Japan next year, I  want to visit Hiroshima, Kyoto, Tokyo... I want to ride a bullet train, I want to experience Japanese culture, eat the food, glean my own impressions and share this unique perspective from being there. My hubby and I love flying it is so fun to share journeys it makes us closer as friends and partners, it is romantic too. The memories and bonding we share are priceless, family is very important to us and we enjoy our sons and experiencing them as adults. 

 

No need t present evidences. 

Until you try something  you will never know if you can do it  If you want to know more about speed reading do some decent research on it and especially how JFK learned to do it and use it as president.

Speed reading does NOT necessarily  affect accuracy especially if you also train your memory But it has many everyday uses. it saves time becsue you can read anyhting in seconds then decide if t worth re reading for a more careful look 

I appreciate you aren't interested That doesnt  mean you couldn't do it but it would take time and effort 

The problem is your dismissal of the reality of speed reading and eidetic  memory.

  Of course you shouldn't tell anyone hallucinations are real you should be teaching them how to tel the difference. Here you are implying that my experiences are hallucinations.  The y are not, they are real physical experiences.

Except when under powerful painkillers in hospital i've never had an hallucination since i was a child.

And it is easy and simple to pick an hallucination even when they are caused by drugs 

Of course it depends on the quality of your dream life but ive done all thise things in controlled lucid dreams I've even train surfed on the top of the bullet train 

I get tastes sensations and all the quality of real life in my dreams. This forms memories which, 50 years later, are as real and vivid as memories of  living exciting moments in my life Plus there are no dangers no costs, no issues with travel and customs etc. 

After your travel all you have is memories.

Memories of my dreams are as complete and permanent as memories of my waking moments.

We also know tha t memories of both dreams and waking events, are identical in structure, and nature, in the brain. 

Thus my memories serve the same purpose as yours without any expense etc.